What happens when the pioneers of Rock are dead and gone?

[fretmonster]

I'm an old geezer that loves that old time blues and rock and roll. IMO most of the newer stuff just doesn't hold a candle to the classic stuff on the inspiration or execution side. Over the weekend my wife and I went to see Felix Cavalieres Rascals and Chuck Negron of Three Dog Night and were blown away. The Rascals are a band that I've always admired and never seen, but like alot of Dinosaur Rockers out there, Felix has replaced his band with younger accomplished musicians. Not only did they cover their own material with aplomb, but mined many classics such as Black Magic Woman and Whole lotta Love and just kicked ass. I'm not a big Three Dog Night fan and think songs like One Man Band should be laid to rest for time and all eternity, but Chuck is an extremely talented singer and also had a crack band. In the last few years I've seen shows by Deep Purple and Thin Lizzy, Crazy Horse, Eric Burden and the new Animals, The Association, Jefferson Starship, Skynard and ZZ Top, Dave Mason and even Gerry and the Pacemakers. You know what, they were all great IMO. I mean its not Pro basketball, Andres Segovia played into his ninetys, Les Paul is still playin circles around pros 60 years younger, and these guys have the luxury of having awesome libraries of inspired music to choose from. So I get home from the show and turn on Saturday Night Live. On Weekend Update there's a picture of Keith and Mick (Stones) with the tag line "The California Raisons are preparing for their next tour". Is there no respect? I mean I'll bet Segovia never had to put up with that {censored}.

[Fear My Potato]

SNL exists on the understanding that nobody is safe from their comedy. Then and only then would what they do be wrong. As long as they don't discriminate when they ridicule, everyone stays happy.

I got to see Jefferson Starship last summer FOR FREE on the steps of the New York State capital. Kick ass!

They still got it

I saw Boston but it was a little stale and I didn't feel comfortable being in the crowd since I didn't pull up in a rusted Camaro.

There's a lot of amazing artists around though. Eddie Vedder and Pearl Jam somehow are still playing and still rocking just as hard as ever. Incubus is a good band to see live. Dave Matthews Band, with it's many haters and it's somewhat odd audience cross section, is an awesome band to see live if you like their studio stuff. Medeski Martin & Wood have been shaking up the jazz scene for over ten years. The classic stuff was groundbreaking, but you have to realize the world has gotten used to it. You're only groundbreaking if you keep challenging things and it seems like a lot of the older bands that used to challenge things stopped staying current. They challenge the old stuff that's already challenged-out and while nobody can play the older styles like the guys who made them, I do get bored of hearing the same old stuff. To each generation their own, I suppose.

Just saying...there's a ton of great artists out there right now making it live every day.

[fretmonster]

Point well taken, and yes I agree that there is still alot of great music being made. But I also think it's a shame that many of the younger generation are not exposed to alot of the classic stuff because it's become "unhip".

[playdabluze]

Originally posted by fretmonster I'm an old geezer that loves that old time blues and rock and roll. IMO most of the newer stuff just doesn't hold a candle to the classic stuff on the inspiration or execution side...

Hopefully, the kids will wake up one day and have their ears opened by listening to Muddy, Chuck, John Lee, etc.

The old guys are quickly dying off...Son Seals passed a few months ago, Clarence "Gatemouth" Brown is probably not long for this world (battling lung cancer). BB King turns 80 this year...he's still out there touring but for how long? Otis Rush, Buddy Guy and Hubert Sumlin are getting up there in years. It's gonna suck big time when these people are all gone...and that's just the blues guys! Never mind the rock 'n roll musicians from the 50s & 60s.

[deadwarpoetsguitar]

I think the central issue isn't that people still play when they're old, it's that many (aka ROLLING STONES) don't continue to progress as artists, but instead try to act like they're still 25, which is just a farce. You don't hear jokes about Bob Dylan being a California Raisin, even though he's about the same age as Mick and the boys. The reason? He's still growing as an artist, doing different things than he was 25 years ago. The Stones haven't put out a record anyone would call classic in what, 25 years? This is to say nothing of Jefferson Whatever, Three Dog Night, Who reunions, etc. While they might still be decent musicians and fun to see live, on another level it's depressing and kind of pathetic to see a band that was once vibrant degenerate to being essentially a cover band of itself.

[Kevman]

This is one sad assed thread. Let's not dwell on the impending death of our heros but enjoy them and see them whenever we can so that we the NOW can pass the Past onto the future.

[BootRoots]

Originally posted by fretmonster I'm an old geezer that loves that old time blues and rock and roll. IMO most of the newer stuff just doesn't hold a candle to the classic stuff on the inspiration or execution side. Over the weekend my wife and I went to see Felix Cavalieres Rascals and Chuck Negron of Three Dog Night and were blown away. The Rascals are a band that I've always admired and never seen, but like alot of Dinosaur Rockers out there, Felix has replaced his band with younger accomplished musicians. Not only did they cover their own material with aplomb, but mined many classics such as Black Magic Woman and Whole lotta Love and just kicked ass. I'm not a big Three Dog Night fan and think songs like One Man Band should be laid to rest for time and all eternity, but Chuck is an extremely talented singer and also had a crack band. In the last few years I've seen shows by Deep Purple and Thin Lizzy, Crazy Horse, Eric Burden and the new Animals, The Association, Jefferson Starship, Skynard and ZZ Top, Dave Mason and even Gerry and the Pacemakers. You know what, they were all great IMO. I mean its not Pro basketball, Andres Segovia played into his ninetys, Les Paul is still playin circles around pros 60 years younger, and these guys have the luxury of having awesome libraries of inspired music to choose from. So I get home from the show and turn on Saturday Night Live. On Weekend Update there's a picture of Keith and Mick (Stones) with the tag line "The California Raisons are preparing for their next tour". Is there no respect? I mean I'll bet Segovia never had to put up with that {censored}.

I see we have long forgoten the pioneers of paragraphs.

[jerry_picker]

Originally posted by Kevman This is one sad assed thread. Let's not dwell on the impending death of our heros but enjoy them and see them whenever we can so that we the NOW can pass the Past onto the future.

Plenty of the pioneers of rock are already dead (starting with Buddy Holly r.i.p 1959). All of them surely will be.

Mozart the virtuoso pianist is dead.
Mozart the composer is eternal.

Rock-and-roll is built on the bones of (mostly) dead bluesmen, and few seem to to give a f***, anyway.

[playdabluze]

Originally posted by jerry_picker Rock-and-roll is built on the bones of (mostly) dead bluesmen, and few seem to to give a f***, anyway.

 

 

+1

[Bbreaker]

I opened for Chuck Negron a few years ago.
He still has a great voice and is a pleasure to deal with.
His band wasn't too shabby either.

[jerry_picker]

Originally posted by Bbreaker I opened for Chuck Negron a few years ago. He still has a great voice and is a pleasure to deal with. His band wasn't too shabby either.

 

 

His cover of "Where Is The Love" with 3DN was a nice piece of vocal work, IMHO.

[_pete_]

They may not be "pioneers" but the guys in Rush have been at it over 30 years and I honesly think they sound better today than they did then. They're stilll writing good stuff too.

[jerry_picker]

The real pioneers already ARE dead.

We are living in the "what happens".

[jjpistols]

Originally posted by jerry_picker The real pioneers already ARE dead. We are living in the "what happens".

Jerry Lee, Chuck, and Little Richard?

[maxnew40]

I used be a huge Rush fan but just can't get into any of the later stuff.

I did open up for Eric Burdon a few years back and he put on a good show, and was a nice guy to boot (also a heavy drinker).

Max

[jerry_picker]

Originally posted by jjpistols Jerry Lee, Chuck, and Little Richard?

Elvis, Buddy, and John Lennon...


I am afraid that Jerry Lee, Chuck, and Richard were done being pioneers 40 years ago. Sure, they're entitled to wear their pioneer garb and parade down Main Street on Founder's Day to the adulation of all. Sad.

[GPLAYER]

About 10 years ago I went to a "free" outdoor show with 3DN sans Chuck Negron.
It was a food festival in my town and they were playing. Didn't expect much, but hey, it was free. I was blown away with how great their performance was. They put on a helluva show. Great musicians, and the vocals were incredible.

One of the best shows I've ever seen.

[Ancient Mariner]

At risk of opening a flame war, it all depends on what one considers progress and musical advancement.

Vai and Satch have taken guitar playing to new heights of technicality. Punk took music to new heights of aggression and inability. Dance has demonstrated music requires neither melody or creativity. Metal has shown just how brutal music can be.

But none of these things have actually advanced music - all they've done is take one aspect of what the 'old guys' were doing and focussed on it until it lost it's 'musicality' in it's extremeness. It's likely many of them looked at what was considered 'progress' and decided to develop themselves further along the paths they'd already walked.

I'd say that, just as classical music is a 'dead genre', so now is rock music. It will be a long time before we see the next creative musical stream. Sure, there'll be guys like the darkness that rehash and inject some fresh adrenaline, but essentially we're seeing what is effectively covers of covers, by feel if not by precise tune. U2 DID do something different, but it was a dead end, rather than a musical springboard.

To do something fresh will require people looking outside themselves, rather than simply trying to play harder/faster/nastier than anyone has done before.

[rright]

Originally posted by fretmonster I'm an old geezer that loves that old time blues and rock and roll. IMO most of the newer stuff just doesn't hold a candle to the classic stuff on the inspiration or execution side. Over the weekend my wife and I went to see Felix Cavalieres Rascals and Chuck Negron of Three Dog Night and were blown away. The Rascals are a band that I've always admired and never seen, but like alot of Dinosaur Rockers out there, Felix has replaced his band with younger accomplished musicians. Not only did they cover their own material with aplomb, but mined many classics such as Black Magic Woman and Whole lotta Love and just kicked ass. I'm not a big Three Dog Night fan and think songs like One Man Band should be laid to rest for time and all eternity, but Chuck is an extremely talented singer and also had a crack band. In the last few years I've seen shows by Deep Purple and Thin Lizzy, Crazy Horse, Eric Burden and the new Animals, The Association, Jefferson Starship, Skynard and ZZ Top, Dave Mason and even Gerry and the Pacemakers. You know what, they were all great IMO. I mean its not Pro basketball, Andres Segovia played into his ninetys, Les Paul is still playin circles around pros 60 years younger, and these guys have the luxury of having awesome libraries of inspired music to choose from. So I get home from the show and turn on Saturday Night Live. On Weekend Update there's a picture of Keith and Mick (Stones) with the tag line "The California Raisons are preparing for their next tour". Is there no respect? I mean I'll bet Segovia never had to put up with that {censored}.

 

 

How was Chuck's performance of "One". I saw him on a PBS Special a few weeks ago and he couldn't nail the high parts at all. Maybe he just had an off night. Procol Harum was also on and did "Whiter Shade Of Pale" and Gary Brooker was right on.

[jjpistols]

Originally posted by Ancient Mariner At risk of opening a flame war, it all depends on what one considers progress and musical advancement. Vai and Satch have taken guitar playing to new heights of technicality. Punk took music to new heights of aggression and inability. Dance has demonstrated music requires neither melody or creativity. Metal has shown just how brutal music can be. But none of these things have actually advanced music - all they've done is take one aspect of what the 'old guys' were doing and focussed on it until it lost it's 'musicality' in it's extremeness. It's likely many of them looked at what was considered 'progress' and decided to develop themselves further along the paths they'd already walked. I'd say that, just as classical music is a 'dead genre', so now is rock music. It will be a long time before we see the next creative musical stream. Sure, there'll be guys like the darkness that rehash and inject some fresh adrenaline, but essentially we're seeing what is effectively covers of covers, by feel if not by precise tune. U2 DID do something different, but it was a dead end, rather than a musical springboard. To do something fresh will require people looking outside themselves, rather than simply trying to play harder/faster/nastier than anyone has done before.

 

 

oh - did you just try to intellectualize rock n roll? come on, it's balls level stuff, and it ain't going away

[GPLAYER]

Rock & Roll will come back when somebody figures out how to make a buck with it again.

[Ancient Mariner]

Originally posted by jjpistols oh - did you just try to intellectualize rock n roll? come on, it's balls level stuff, and it ain't going away

 

 

Not at all. And I certainly don't want it to go. All I did was try to explain why the 'old fellers' never apparently progressed. They saw the crap that was considered progress and wanted none of it.

 

Personally I'm happy to play what has already been played before. I love the feel of it and the way it works. But the guitar in it's present form is all mined out IMO.

[LAracer]

I have to disagree with the sentiment here. There have been pioneers all over the road between Robert Johnson and now. Let's see, off the top of my head (and biased toward my own taste obviously):

50s: Buddy, Jerry-Lee, Perkins, etc
60s: Lennon, McCartney, Morrison, Sid Barrett, Hendrix, Cream, etc, etc, etc
70s: Gilmour & Waters, Knopfler, Zeppelin, Ramones, ACDC, etc
80s: Danzig, Metallica, GNR, etc
90s: Nirvana, Soundgarden, Jane's Addiction, RHCP, Nine Inch Nails, Ministry, etc
00s: Difficult to tell without the benefit of hindsight, but some pop-rock bands like Franz Ferdinand and Garbage are taking rock in an interesting direction. Ask me in 10 years who the pioneers were.

All these artists have taken rock in new and unique directions. That makes them pioneers. And by the way (IMO) alot of old-time bands are just old bands; they didn't do anything particularly great, but they are sentimental to us. I didn't listen to alot of that ~70s stadium rock stuff (won't start a flame war by mentioning bands) so I have no attachment, and to me most of it sounds like crap.

And sure, alot of those from the top of the list aren't around anymore, but we shouldn't let that stop us from discovering the latest soon-to-be legends. I think it's so cool that my mom saw the Stones at a small local dive before they were anybody. I will be able to tell my kids the same thing about bands like Soundgarden and Nine Inch Nails.

[deadwarpoetsguitar]

Garbage is a joke. Take three talented but ugly middle-aged studio hacks and inject a hot woman, doing things that other bands have been doing in smaller venues for years.

I personally think a lot of the genre blending stuff variously dubbed shoegaze, post-rock, trip-hop, etc. is really where the advancement of "rock" is going to happen. My Bloody Valentine still sounds futuristic, and grunge pretty much killed the shoegaze movement before it could progress much.


And progression as an artist doesn't require pushing music forward. Nothing Bob Dylan has done in the last 30 years is really "NEW," but it is new to him, which is the interesting part.

[jjpistols]

Originally posted by Ancient Mariner Not at all. And I certainly don't want it to go. All I did was try to explain why the 'old fellers' never apparently progressed. They saw the crap that was considered progress and wanted none of it. Personally I'm happy to play what has already been played before. I love the feel of it and the way it works. But the guitar in it's present form is all mined out IMO.

ok, I understand

to me, the beauty of rock n roll has always been the aspect of a young kid grabbing a guitar, learning a few chords and hollerin' about whatever's on his mind, as long as he can make it rhyme

I guess hiphop has taken a lot of our young minds from us by doing basically the same thing, but without the learning a few chords part - doesn't hit me the same way, although some of it is tolerable in the right setting

and yeah, a lot of it now is recycled, but what art/entertainment isn't at this point? I'm not sure I would like to hear something too new in rock/punk/metal - look what the "nu" did to us

keep rockin' Ancient Mariner:cool: